Using the author’s logic, it is Google then that will lead. Unlike Apple, they have even more devices in the field PLUS they have strong models PLUS Apple uses Google models.
> Apple uses Google models
Source?
Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
241–250 of 402 posts
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#242Gemma4 in my view is good enough to do things similar to Gemini 2.5 flash, meaning if I point it code and ask for help and there is a problem with the code it’ll answer correctly in terms of suggestions but it’s not great at using all tools or one shooting things that require a lot of context or “expert knowledge” If a couple more iterations of this, say gemma6 is as good as current opus and runs completely locally o…
> if I point it code and ask for help and there is a problem with the code it’ll answer correctly in terms of suggestions could I ask how you do that? I installed openclaw and set it to use Gemma 4 but it didn't act in an agent mode at all, it only responded in the chat window while doing nothing, and didn't read any files or do anything that you wrote (though I see you do mention that it's not great at using all too…
I had the same issues. I had to tell it to use sub agents explicitly, and instead of saying set a cron say set an openclaw cron.
I generally do like the model, it’s not a great agent though.
It’s good for summarization tasks, small tool use, and has pretty good world knowledge, though it does hallucinate.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#243Any field with abstraction becomes susceptible to ai disruption. In fact, ai susceptibility is proportional to the amount of abstraction. In this sense, the more abstraction then the more ai will displace people (my observation). This turns the millenia old model upside down. Traditionally more abstraction required more schooling and experience and was rewarded with more financial rewards. Until robots and world models become safe, affordable and ubiquitous, the financial apex of careers will be those that are abstraction resistant (technicians, emts, trades, etc) and those protected by requlation and the requlators(politicians, ceos)
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#244one day people will realize that Tim Cook as one of the best killer CEOs.
by now - by now he has more hits than Steve Jobs. His precision, and being able to manage risk maybe due to his supply chain background have made Apple into the killer it is today.
if we were in the age of Robber barons he would've been up there with them.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#245The best part is that it’ll all run on your device, instead of siphoning off your data to the provider. Local first AI.
I think the creatives will also turn around their seething hatred of AI for Apple AI because they use more ethical training data and it feels more like they own their AI, no one’s charging them a subscription fee to use it and then using their private data for training.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#246Honestly, I think part of the reason Apple hasn't jumped deep into AI is due to two big reasons: 1) Apple is not a data company. 2) Apple hasn't found a compelling, intuitive, and most of all, consistent, user experience for AI yet. Regarding point 2: I haven't seen anyone share a hands down improved UX for a user driven product outside of something that is a variation of a chat bot. Even the main AI players can't ad…
As for consistency, Apple's latest UI shows they don't give a damn any more.
I'm pretty sure most people didn't notice any kind of inconsistency. I myself have a hard time figuring out what's going on. I'm so focused on doing the work with the computer that I don't have the time to notice what's "wrong" with the OS. Which makes me wonder if the whole thing is blown out of proportion.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a lot of people are not hype about AI in their toaster, but... I don't think people are generally turned off form deeper integration in their OS itself. Especially when for some people this is representing ideas similar to how programmer-types get excited about Shortcuts. Decently accessible automation and discovery, without having to go figure out a bunch of stuff
> Decently accessible automation and discovery, without having to go figure out a bunch of stuff Sure, but is this actually happening ? Last time I tried, Atlassian's heavily-pushed AI couldn't even turn a Jira ticket number of Confluence into a clickable link. Similarly, Windows has been actively moving away from providing locally-installed applications in the Start menu search towards offering random internet garba…
Unfortunately companies seem to be in panic mode about making ANY offering to not become irrelevant that they're giving AI overall a bad reputation. Everyone made a mad dash and didn't spent enough time making that product well thought out. Some got burned by it such as Microsoft.
Everyone seems well convinced AI can just replace 90% of software out there but I've yet to see any evidence of that. Sure it can stand up a blog, get a simple app together pretty quick but once you get into larger scale software it's not capable of doing it by itself and you still need teams of developers working together.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#248Apple aren’t in the business of building chatbots to impress investors (other than some WWDC2024 vaporware they’d rather not talk about any more). They’re in the business of consumer hardware. Consumers want iPhones and (if Apple are right) some form of AR glasses in the next decade. That’s their focus. There’s a huge amount of machine learning and inference that’s required to get those to work. But it’s under the ho…
Consumers don't necessarily want iPhone. They don't want to be excluded from iMessage, which is a completely different motivation.
That is a very US centric opinion.
In other part of the globe iphone users are mostly using whatsapp or Line and couldn't care less about imessage.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#249Gemma4 in my view is good enough to do things similar to Gemini 2.5 flash, meaning if I point it code and ask for help and there is a problem with the code it’ll answer correctly in terms of suggestions but it’s not great at using all tools or one shooting things that require a lot of context or “expert knowledge” If a couple more iterations of this, say gemma6 is as good as current opus and runs completely locally o…
similar vibes as "640k ought to be enough for anybody"
More than "a 3 year old laptop is fine"
My thinkpad is nearly 10 years old, I upgraded it to 32GB of ram and have replaced the battery a couple of times, but it's absolutely fine apart from that.
If AI which was leading edge in 2023 can run on a 2026 laptop, then presumably AI which is leading edge in 2026 will run on a 2029 laptop. Given that 2023 was world changing then that capacity is now on today's laptop
Either AI grows exponentially in which case it doesn't matter as all work will be done by AI by 2035, or it plateaus in say 2032 in which case by 2035 those models will run on a typical laptop.
Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well you can do a lot with 640k…if you try. We have 16G in base machines and very few people know how to try anymore. The world has moved on, that code-golf time is now spent on ad algorithms or whatever. Escaping the constraint delivered a different future than anticipated.
The simple fact is that a 16 GB RAM stick costs much less than the development time to make the app run on less.
> The simple fact is that a 16 GB RAM stick costs much less than the development time to make the app run on less.
The costs are borne by different people: development by the company, RAM sticks by the customer.
A company is potentially (silently?) adding to the cost of the product/service that the customer has to bear by needed to have more RAM (or have the same amount, but can't do as much with it).